Case Digest (G.R. No. 167334)
Facts:
Catholic Vicariate, Baguio City v. Hon. Patricia A. Sto. Tomas, Secretary of the Department of Labor & Employment, and George Agbucay, G.R. No. 167334, March 07, 2008, Second Division, Tinga, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Catholic Vicariate of Baguio City contracted Kunwha Luzon Construction (KUNWHA) to build a retaining wall for Baguio Cathedral. KUNWHA subcontracted CEREBA Builders (CEREBA) to perform formwork; the subcontract ran until completion (dates in the record vary between 8 and 18 September 2000). KUNWHA allegedly failed to pay CEREBA, and CEREBA in turn failed to pay its laborers.
On 29 August 2000 respondent George Agbucay, joined by 81 other workers, filed a complaint with the DOLE-CAR Regional Office against CEREBA, KUNWHA and the Vicariate for nonpayment of wages and holiday premiums. A DOLE inspection found wage and holiday-pay deficiencies and missing employment records, and the parties were given five days to rectify; they did not. At an administrative hearing CEREBA said it would pay contingent on KUNWHA paying it; the Vicariate asserted that the KUNWHA retention fee it held could cover the deficiencies.
On 12 March 2001 the DOLE-CAR Regional Director issued an order holding CEREBA, KUNWHA and the Vicariate jointly and severally liable to 82 workers for P1,029,952.80 (P12,560.40 per worker). During reconsideration proceedings KUNWHA voluntarily paid 23 workers P84,544.00; on 21 May 2001 the Regional Director dismissed the complaint insofar as those 23 workers were concerned because of the settlement, advising others to pursue claims in an appropriate forum.
On appeal the Secretary of Labor reversed the May 21, 2001 disposition, declared the 23-worker settlement unconscionable and reinstated the March 12, 2001 order (23 June 2003). The Secretary also found that an employer-employee relationship subsisted at the time the complaint was filed and invoked Article 128(b) of the Labor Code to justify the Regional Director’s exercise of visitorial jurisdiction. Petition for reconsideration was denied (19 January 2004).
The Court of Appeals, in CA-G.R. SP No. 83518, affirmed the Secretary’s order on 28 September 2004 with the modification that the P84,544.00 previously paid be deducted from each of the applicable 23 workers’ claims. Petitioner elev...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Secretary of Labor (and by extension the Regional Director) validly acquire and retain jurisdiction over the complaint under Article 128(b) of the Labor Code?
- Are the quitclaims signed by the 22 of the 23 affected employees valid and enforceable?
- May the monetary award be extended to affected employees who did not ap...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)